Coin Community Family of Web Sites
Like us on Facebook! Subscribe to our Youtube Channel! Check out our Twitter! Check out our Pinterest!
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some coins?
Our coin forum is completely free! Register Now!

PCGS Issue, Please Let Me Know What You Think.

 
Next Page
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2
Pillar of the Community
United States
527 Posts
 Posted 08/03/2019  03:24 am Show Profile   Check casualcoincollector's eBay Listings Check casualcoincollector's eCrater Listings Bookmark this topic Add casualcoincollector to your friends list Get a Link to this Message
So, I'm not quite sure why I keep having issues with PCGS but I have another one.

Here is the situation. I sent in what I believe is an extremely rare original 1725 beard token to PCGS and got the grading results from them yesterday and there are some issues. They say that it is counterfeit but the problem is that they have the completely wrong description associated with the submission (please see the photos below).



This is the token that I submitted:



This is the variety of token that PCGS attributed to my token Brekke-12:




The two tokens don't even look remotely similar. Even a non collector could tell these are massively different. It seems to me that PCGS compared my token submission to the wrong variety and then since they didn't look the same just declared it a counterfeit without doing any additional research.

The actual variety that matches my submission should be Brekke-9:




The big problem that I have with all of this is that I included my research with my submission under the comments section and gave them a starting point and PCGS seemingly didn't even bother to read it:

"I've done a bit research into the token included in this submission and I believe that is it an extremely rare original issued 1725 Russian Beard Tax Token. Specifically the same variety as the one housed at the State Hermitage Museum in Saint Petersburg Russia (please see the attached photo). The photo is a scan taken from the Beard Token Reference Book and Catalog "Rudenko I. "Beard tokens 1698.1705.1724.1725." and is catalog reference number 21 within that book, which is also Bitkin # 3902 and Brekke # 9. I have been corresponding with the author of that reference book Mr. Rudenko and even though he has not seen this token in hand he agrees with me that based on extensive photos that he thinks that it is an original issue of variety 21 from his reference book. I know that if proven genuine this is a very obscure and rare token. According to an article written by the author of the reference book as of 2016 there were only four known examples of original 1725 beard tokens and all are in museums. I am including this information to save you some effort and to point you in the right direction. I hope this information does not come off as too forward. Please let me know if you have any questions for me or require any additional information from me."

It came off to me that PCGS is basically saying that my submitted token didn't look like the token PCGS knew of so it must be a counterfeit token. Which is a ridiculous notion in my opinion. I emailed PCGS customer service last night about this asking them how they can say whether or not something is a counterfeit when they don't even seem to know what they were looking at and gave them all of the info that I have again.

Another big issue that I have with all of this is that I happen to know a lot about this particular subject and have been researching this token for a few months now. If I didn't know any better I would have just walked away and let this go and that really makes me wonder how many items that PCGS does this with and people just walk away because they don't know any better.

From my current point of view in regards to this matter it seems to me that PCGS didn't even really bother to do any research into my submission and just took my money and until I hear back from them this is how it looks to me. This situation really just doesn't sit well with me and is a pretty blatant failure of service in my opinion on PCGS's part. Please let me know your thoughts on the matter.
Edited by casualcoincollector
08/03/2019 04:36 am
Bedrock of the Community
United States
29968 Posts
 Posted 08/03/2019  04:25 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add John1 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Here is my two cents: I would definitely call PCGS and not hang up until they agreed to take another look at the token (at no additional charge). Question to CCF members,is one of the 3 TPG's better at tokens than the others?
John1
( I'm no pro, it's just my humble opinion )
Searched 5+ Million Cents Since 1971
Pillar of the Community
United States
547 Posts
 Posted 08/03/2019  05:47 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add carwash to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
with John1 PCGS dropped the ball on this one.
Pillar of the Community
Learn More...
United States
2074 Posts
 Posted 08/03/2019  08:04 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add t360 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
You clearly have expertise in this area and have done through research. What do you hope to gain by getting an opinion from someone who knows absolutely nothing about these tokens?
Bedrock of the Community
United States
15939 Posts
 Posted 08/03/2019  08:55 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Conder101 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Forget the email, CALL them.
Gary Schmidt
Bedrock of the Community
Learn More...
United States
42214 Posts
 Posted 08/03/2019  09:25 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Coinfrog to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Absolutely, and good luck.
Bedrock of the Community
Learn More...
United States
17900 Posts
 Posted 08/03/2019  2:15 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add moxking to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
This needs a phone connection. Best of luck.

I have my world and tokens done with NGC. Never doubted anything they've said for grade or authenticity.
Pillar of the Community
United States
527 Posts
 Posted 08/03/2019  10:49 pm  Show Profile   Check casualcoincollector's eBay Listings Check casualcoincollector's eCrater Listings Bookmark this reply Add casualcoincollector to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks for the comments everyone. I'll give PCGS customer service a call after I receive the Token back in the mail most likely sometime early to mid next week. I want to wait for the package just to make sure that there aren't any problems with it before I call.

@ t360,

Quote:
You clearly have expertise in this area and have done through research. What do you hope to gain by getting an opinion from someone who knows absolutely nothing about these tokens?

I am personally convinced that this token is genuine. I have done the research and I have corresponded with the current world expert in regards to that. This satisfies the criteria for my personal collection but for insurance purposes and if I ever decide that I want to try to sell this token down the road I really would like a third party to back up this assertion with a guarantee of some sort as to it being genuine. This is an extremely rare token, even though there were 2600 pieces originally produced according to records the bulk were destroyed in 1728 to make other coins and as of 2016 there were only 4 examples known to exist and all are in museums. This would most likely make mine only the 5th known example of an original issued 1725 beard token.
Edited by casualcoincollector
08/03/2019 11:02 pm
Pillar of the Community
United States
527 Posts
 Posted 08/06/2019  6:20 pm  Show Profile   Check casualcoincollector's eBay Listings Check casualcoincollector's eCrater Listings Bookmark this reply Add casualcoincollector to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
So, I just finished talking to PCGS customer service. The rep said that she would send all of the info that I provided over to the world coin department and they will get back to me in the next couple of days. we'll see what happens. I'll call them again on Friday if I don't hear back from them by then.
Pillar of the Community
United States
615 Posts
 Posted 08/06/2019  6:32 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add joecoin to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
. I have done the research and I have corresponded with the current world expert in regards to that.


I'd say documentation from the leading expert, with some sort of photo certificate would be a far better indication of authenticity than a piece of plastic from someone who has no clue as to what you have.

But that's just me.
Pillar of the Community
United States
3404 Posts
 Posted 08/06/2019  6:37 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add jimbucks to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I was under the impression that NGC is more versed on the world issues, but perhaps I'm mistaken?
Pillar of the Community
United States
527 Posts
 Posted 08/06/2019  6:54 pm  Show Profile   Check casualcoincollector's eBay Listings Check casualcoincollector's eCrater Listings Bookmark this reply Add casualcoincollector to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
@joecoin,

I completely agree with you but no competent expert would certify any numismatic item without seeing it in hand and I'm not sending this item to Russia since I may never get it back. Due to its rarity it may fall under the category of nationally significant artifacts and be seized. It would be no different than sending a rare samurai sword to Japan for authentication and the Japanese government seizing it.

@jimbucks,

I actually tried sending this item to NGC first and they kind of copped out in that they refused to certify or authenticate it because it was silver plated at one time (most of it is worn off now) and refunded my money but at least they got the description right.

https://www.NGCcoin.com/certlookup/...9-001/other/

The reason I think this was a cop-out is that original issued Bread tokens were commonly either gold or silver plated by the user. This was because the noblemen got silver versions and the commoners and merchants got copper version. So, the commoners and merchants would gold or silver plate them to try to be more like noblemen.
Edited by casualcoincollector
08/07/2019 01:45 am
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12572 Posts
 Posted 08/07/2019  01:52 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add basebal21 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
As far as this one PCGS and NGC both declined it so no PCGS didn't steal your money. 99.9 percent of the time a attribution on the website is a wrong click of the mouse on the menu which means even less when they aren't willing to say it is genuine.

You may think it is and maybe it is I don't know, but they can't think they have to be sure or they will not do it. There cannot be authenticity questions about it on their end or saying that we're pretty sure.


Quote:
I was under the impression that NGC is more versed on the world issues, but perhaps I'm mistaken?


That was true many years ago, not now. Certain countries prefer one over the other, but the days of world coins should be NGC have been over for years.
Pillar of the Community
United States
527 Posts
 Posted 08/07/2019  02:16 am  Show Profile   Check casualcoincollector's eBay Listings Check casualcoincollector's eCrater Listings Bookmark this reply Add casualcoincollector to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
@basebal21,

I see your point but I honestly don't think that this is the case in this particular situation since it came back as "counterfeit" and not "authenticity unverifiable". Since it came back as counterfeit that makes me think that the scenario that I proposed is most likely what actually happened and it wasn't just a slip of a mouse. I think that this is due to the fact that the brekke-9 variety looks very crude when compared to the brekke-12 variety thus making it look like counterfeit when that is all that you are comparing it to. That's just speculation but it makes a lot of sense to me. If they just weren't willing to say it was genuine it probably would have come back as authenticity unverifiable. Regardless, I'm just going to wait and see what they say. There's no point in getting into an argument over it on here.
Edited by casualcoincollector
08/07/2019 04:36 am
Bedrock of the Community
United States
15939 Posts
 Posted 08/07/2019  1:26 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Conder101 to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
The reason I think this was a cop-out is that original issued Bread tokens were commonly either gold or silver plated by the user. This was because the noblemen got silver versions and the commoners and merchants got copper version. So, the commoners and merchants would gold or silver plate them to try to be more like noblemen.

But since the plating was not of mint origin the token was still altered post mint, which would justify rejecting it for slabbing.

Inotice they referred to it as a novodel which would indicate it wasn't a original. The "non-holes" at the top and bottom bother me. The picture of the Brekke-9 does show holes but the "pre-holes" in yours are not in the same place, and the original does not show evidence of such pre-holes. So it strikes me that your token is either a novodel made from a die created from a different specimen, or just a copy made from one. Since there are only four genuine tokens known, it may be possible to determine if this token is a copy of one of the known ones.
Gary Schmidt
Pillar of the Community
United States
527 Posts
 Posted 08/07/2019  3:03 pm  Show Profile   Check casualcoincollector's eBay Listings Check casualcoincollector's eCrater Listings Bookmark this reply Add casualcoincollector to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
@Conder101,

In regards to NGC I get what you are saying and that's why I let go but what kind of annoyed me is that NGC used to authenticate plated items as "genuine" all the time through NCS and now according to the customer service rep they don't authenticate "genuine" anymore and it just seems kind of odd to me that an authentication company isn't really interested in trying to authenticate things.

What you said after that doesn't really make sense to me if you want to try and clarify it I will try to give you a better answer. They referred to it as a Novodel because the variety of Brekke-12 is a Novodel Variety. the holes in Brekke-9 were put in by the mint by hand so they are obviously not going to be in the exact same places. If they were in the exact same places I would find that suspicious, my item is most definitely plugged at both the top and bottom meaning it was holed at one time and then the holes were filled in (so I don't get what you mean by non-holes). It is most definitely a different material that is filling the holes.
Edited by casualcoincollector
08/07/2019 3:49 pm
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.

Coin Community Member eBay Sales

Certified Coins   Certified VAMs   Certified Errors  




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2019 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2019 Coin Community Forums
It took 1.06 seconds to rattle this change. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05